Al Gore--environmental saboteur?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Open wider dude! Put out the vacancy sign while your at it.

Yeah yeah yeah. Heard it all before Marc.

Same old nonsensical ####### you usually put out.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

YfucpGCm5hY

[Peikko 1,575]

He's invested quite deeply into companies that would skyrocket if green legislation is passed. The Telegraph was saying he could become a billionaire off the legislation.

So, he has quite a bit more motivating him than just spreading a message.

So what? He's not the driving force behind the discussion on climate science and global warming. So he has worked out a way to make a buck out of it? I'm not sure if that's admirable or shameful, I guess it depends on what way we are looking at the free market today.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Yeah yeah yeah. Heard it all before Marc.

Same old nonsensical ####### you usually put out.

That you love to pick-up with a spoon?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

That you love to pick-up with a spoon?

Got any more silly one-liners up your sleeve, or are you done being a #######?

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Got any more silly one-liners up your sleeve, or are you done being a #######?

You.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So what? He's not the driving force behind the discussion on climate science and global warming. So he has worked out a way to make a buck out of it? I'm not sure if that's admirable or shameful, I guess it depends on what way we are looking at the free market today.

Gore is a partisan figure in a highly partisan political climate - That's about all there is to it.

[mRx 16]

So what? He's not the driving force behind the discussion on climate science and global warming. So he has worked out a way to make a buck out of it? I'm not sure if that's admirable or shameful, I guess it depends on what way we are looking at the free market today.

Not sure what aim you're taking here by trivializing Gore's involvement, but he is a "driving force" behind global warming activism. His awards and accolades speak for themselves.

And there's nothing "free market" about lobbying for power...

Gore is a partisan figure in a highly partisan political climate - That's about all there is to it.

Yeah, that and a billion dollars.

[Pooky 3,844]

So what? He's not the driving force behind the discussion on climate science and global warming. So he has worked out a way to make a buck out of it? I'm not sure if that's admirable or shameful, I guess it depends on what way we are looking at the free market today.

No, he's not the driving force behind it. In fact, I'd wager he has had no scientific input into it whatsoever.

Unfortunately for educated debate on the subject (i.e. non-scientists) Al Gore is the very public face of "Global Warming", and thereby has damaged discussion and education about the science beyond imagination. Without Al Gore, his seriously flawed docu-movie and his do as I say not as I do lifestyle, we would be a lot further down the path than we are now.

So yes, he's a big factor in all of this.

[Ali G. 37]

So, you are not bothered that all reasonableness has been removed from the dialectic? We have let the wings drive the debate, rather than the quorum as a whole. Either it's all doom and gloom, or it's all made up. I don't see anyone looking at the actual data, that believes either case is true.

No one ever claimed its doom and gloom twit.

Australia had one of their warmest summers on record last year. DC, Beijing, and Moscow just broke snow records this seasons. Our own beach waters in the Atlantic were the warmest on record last year.

How does anyone with an engineering or science degree not grasp that pumping excessive amounts of pollutants and chemicals into out environment and atmosphere will cause it to either have a massive correction, ice age, or cause it to die off.

Edit: Don't know much about Gore but I do know that I would listen to someone who attended the world's best university over a dropout talkshow host anytime.

Edited February 23, 2010 by Booyah

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

No one ever claimed its doom and gloom twit.

* sigh *

[Peikko 1,575]

No, he's not the driving force behind it. In fact, I'd wager he has had no scientific input into it whatsoever.

Unfortunately for educated debate on the subject (i.e. non-scientists) Al Gore is the very public face of "Global Warming", and thereby has damaged discussion and education about the science beyond imagination. Without Al Gore, his seriously flawed docu-movie and his do as I say not as I do lifestyle, we would be a lot further down the path than we are now.

So yes, he's a big factor in all of this.

Is he really though? I mean, yeah he made a film and that, but his input is sporadic at best. I believe there is a spotlight placed on Al Gore by the ideological skeptics because they want to maintain this fiction that Al Gore is driving the debate in order to establish a link between Climate science and political liberalism. It's a fantasy cooked up to muddy the waters. I don't buy it at all but it would seem that a lot of people do. I don't get that.

Edited February 23, 2010 by Madame Cleo

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Stop the name calling - it adds nothing to the discussion and really diminishes the value of whatever it is you have to say. It is possible to discuss differences in points of view without resorting to insults and personal attacks. Please do so from now on.

Edited February 23, 2010 by Kathryn41

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Thanks, mom!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Thanks, mom!

Feel up to defending your argument that atmospheric CO2 levels have no real impact on the earth's temperature?